Hi Freedda
Having read Bradfords substantial and erudite work on the Tarot I would point out that he only examines a very limited range of possibilities for the 22 cards of the Major Arcana. There are other interpreations that make far more sense. That does rather limit any interpretations of that particular pice of his work.
As much as I dont like to critique Bradfords work at all, it has to be seen that statistically there being so many minor arcana cards, plus the major arcana cards that it is likely to be able to find corellations with any individual part of the Yi one cares to consider. Only if there was coherency in the relationships could it be ssen to have correlations.
And it is rather strange that he does say that there is little agreement on the meanings and then develops detailed meanings, which are only one of the many "types " of meaning that are use in connection with the Tarot, and not aprticularly the ones that would find any clear correlation with Astrology and so would be hard to "fit" Tarot and Astrology with the intepreations of the Tarot he uses.
He does not explain how 8 or 64 has any realcorrelation with the 22 major arcana or the 56 minor arcana. 8 does go into the total minor cards but as they are made up of distinct Numbers 1-10 and 4 court cards it is hard to see the rationality of how it all connects and it may be nothing more than numerical coincedence. The addition of the known images of the Yi that also add up to 78 may be relevant or it may be coincidence. Bradford does acknowledge that despite the total there is no other clear correlations within the layouts.
Unfortunately his article is rather short in each section on the comparison with other complex systems and by need of brevity I suspect rather simplistic.
And while he suggests that if we superimpose various complex systems over each other they get bent or stretched a little that is actually not correct. The little bends and stratches between the other complex systems can actaully be easily explained, most of which are down to rather simple errors that many have questioned in one way or another, and it is only the Yi that has to be bent and stretched to make it fit with the others. But it has to be stratched huge amounts. That is hardly surprising given that the Yi is an iteration of binary values and whether we call them Yin and Yang or even if the concept was given a name the fact that a line is binary reveals the nature of the Yi.
The question has lawys been as to why are there 6 lines. There is significance in 6, that correlates with the other complex sytems that Bradford references.
But hardly esoteric if it all connects together and there are underlying principles in the Yi.
Any thoughts?
Dave
Having read Bradfords substantial and erudite work on the Tarot I would point out that he only examines a very limited range of possibilities for the 22 cards of the Major Arcana. There are other interpreations that make far more sense. That does rather limit any interpretations of that particular pice of his work.
As much as I dont like to critique Bradfords work at all, it has to be seen that statistically there being so many minor arcana cards, plus the major arcana cards that it is likely to be able to find corellations with any individual part of the Yi one cares to consider. Only if there was coherency in the relationships could it be ssen to have correlations.
And it is rather strange that he does say that there is little agreement on the meanings and then develops detailed meanings, which are only one of the many "types " of meaning that are use in connection with the Tarot, and not aprticularly the ones that would find any clear correlation with Astrology and so would be hard to "fit" Tarot and Astrology with the intepreations of the Tarot he uses.
He does not explain how 8 or 64 has any realcorrelation with the 22 major arcana or the 56 minor arcana. 8 does go into the total minor cards but as they are made up of distinct Numbers 1-10 and 4 court cards it is hard to see the rationality of how it all connects and it may be nothing more than numerical coincedence. The addition of the known images of the Yi that also add up to 78 may be relevant or it may be coincidence. Bradford does acknowledge that despite the total there is no other clear correlations within the layouts.
Unfortunately his article is rather short in each section on the comparison with other complex systems and by need of brevity I suspect rather simplistic.
And while he suggests that if we superimpose various complex systems over each other they get bent or stretched a little that is actually not correct. The little bends and stratches between the other complex systems can actaully be easily explained, most of which are down to rather simple errors that many have questioned in one way or another, and it is only the Yi that has to be bent and stretched to make it fit with the others. But it has to be stratched huge amounts. That is hardly surprising given that the Yi is an iteration of binary values and whether we call them Yin and Yang or even if the concept was given a name the fact that a line is binary reveals the nature of the Yi.
The question has lawys been as to why are there 6 lines. There is significance in 6, that correlates with the other complex sytems that Bradford references.
But hardly esoteric if it all connects together and there are underlying principles in the Yi.
Any thoughts?
Dave